August 2022
This month’s reports summarises four pieces of research that in/directly relate to the impact of universities. The first paper is a reflection on education, and how the contemporary mechanisations of university reality disturb the student learning experience (Fullford, 2016). The second study surveyed the environmental science literature in relation to understand what successful knowledge exchange looks like (Karcher et al. 2021). The third reflective paper is the idea of a “slow professor” that the authors eventually developed into a full book (Berg & Seeber, 2013). The last item is a book with many contributes on the topic of ethical evidence and policymaking (Iphofen and Mathuna, 2022).
[1]) In this conceptual piece Amanda Fullford contrast the ideas of Martin Buber and Emmanuel Levinas on dialogic intersubjectivity, and an ethics of responsibility in relation to teaching in Higher Education. She comments upon the marketization, narrowing and commodifying of the student experience antithetical for learning and meeting the other. She contests that only “a Foucauldian heterotopia which rejects the expectation-bound economy of exchange, and which offers instead the possibility of an education marked by an economy of excess” (p. 423) can recapture the pedagogic needed to represent an antidote to neoliberal and managerial excess.
[2]) The study represents a scoping review of environmental science literature about what constitutes successful knowledge exchange activities. They surveyed 397 articles, which they identified through and iterative process focusing only on were they “only focus[ed] on positive outcomes and benefits" (p. 204). They found a disconnect between the stated desired goals and what was the reported impact. They speculated this could be due to a variety of different reasons, either the timeframes were too small for the intended impacts to manifest, they were too complex to evidence or other more tangible aspects overshadowed them in the reporting. Furthermore, they reemphasised the importance of qualitative methods as the most common means to capture impacts, with interviews and surveys being the two most dominant ones. Furthermore they also stressed that “evaluation of any impact as beneficial or desirable must take into account the perceptions of the intended beneficiaries, as well as other groups who might be disadvantaged or harmed (both winners and losers).“ (p. 213). Which is fair enough, but curious of why they did not apply it in their own research design.
[3]) The central thesis developed in the paper, is that the university reality with its performance measures, culture of accountability and managerial demands leads to a speeding up of the work life of academics. The downside of such increased speed is rising stress levels, feelings of guilt of not measuring up and decreasing time and space for reflection. They take inspiration from the slow food movement, and conceptualise a “slow professor” as a means of resistance to a corporatized ideal of what a professor ought to be, that cast its desired goals in terms of value for money rather than educational experience or advancement of knowledge.
[4]) Researchers and commentators have a moral obligation in debate and discussions that relate to policymaking to point out their own viewpoints and limitations, especially when the issues relate to controversial, entrenched or uncertain viewpoints. Public trust and scientific understanding is not enhanced when policies and advocates are not transparent with the provided information, even if the intention is well-meaning and understandable within the specific context. The different contributions point out how the issue of evidencing becomes political and what researchers can do in order to retain their research integrity when placed in difficult circumstances.
[1] Fulford, A. (2016). Education: Expectation and the unexpected. Studies in philosophy and education, 35(4), 415-425.
[2] Karcher, D. B., Cvitanovic, C., Colvin, R. M., van Putten, I. E., & Reed, M. S. (2021). Is this what success looks like? Mismatches between the aims, claims, and evidence used to demonstrate impact from knowledge exchange processes at the interface of environmental science and policy. Environmental Science & Policy, 125, 202-218.
[3] Berg. M. & Seeber, B. K. (2013). The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 6(3): Volume 6 Issue 3 April 2013
[4] Iphofen, R., & O’Mathúna, D. (Eds.). (2022). Ethical evidence and policymaking: Interdisciplinary and international research. Policy Press.
